The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-08-13
Srecta1 Contributors.
JESUS BEFORE THE SANHED Rim.
BY REV. WILLIAM TUCKER, d. D.
Mount Gilead,O.l


The trial, conviction and execution
of Jesus was illegal, because it was in
violation of the principles of both He
brew and Roman criminal law.
Twenty three years before the trial
of Christ, the Sanhedrin lost the power
of passing the death sentence, This
took place after the deposition of Arch
claus, son and successor Of HerOd, II
A. D. Judea had become a Roman
province, and the procuratOrs who ad
ministered justice in the name of Au-
gustus deprived the Sanhedrin of its
supreme power, in order that they
themselves might exercise the sovereign
right over life and death.
Every province annexed to the Ro-
man empire had to submit to this and
as Tacitus says, the Romans reserved
to themselves the right of the sword
and neglected all else. The Sanhedrn
still, however, retained the right to try
all but capital Offenses, to excommu-
nicate, to put in prison and to in
flict corporal punishment. The prin-
cipal right of its sovereignty-namely
the right over life and death, it pos
sessed no longer. The Talmud, jeal-
Gus as it is of the independence of the
Jewish nation, Is constrained to admit
this fact. 1t says little more than
forty years before the destruction of
the temple, the power of prOnouncing
capital sentences was taken away from
the Jews. If Christ had committed
a capital offense, as the Sanhedrin
claimed, as a Jewish Court it had at
the time of the trial of Christ no juris-
diction of the offense. The whole pro-
ceeding was, therefore, illegal. 1t was
a usurpatiOn of authority on the part
of the Sanhedrin, to which they had no
legal right-such right having been
taken from them by the Roman gov
ernment. These facts were known to
the members of the Sanhedrin and to
PLATE. Both parties knew the Sanhe-
drin had no jurisdiction of the Offense
with which they charged Christ, and
that no such crime as that of the bias
phemy charged against Christ was
known to Roman criminal law. In the
face of these known facts the Sanhe-
drin tried and condemned Christ and
Plate executed him, not only without
authority of, but in direct violation of
law, both Jewish and Roman. This
settles the illegality of the trial jew
ish criminal law required.
l. The court must not be held on the
Sabbath or any holy day. 'The court
must not be held on the Sabbath or any
holy day" (Mishnah, Betz, chapter s.
.. The court could not assemble even
on the day preceding the Sabbath or
any feast day. .sThey shall not judge
on the eve of the Sabbath, nor on that
of any festival. (Mishnah Sanhedrin,
chapter 6.)
3. The trial of an important case
could not be continued during the night,
'Let it be tried during the day and sus-
pended at night" (Mishnah Sanhe-
drin, chapter g.
4. No session Of the court to take
place before the offering of the morning
sacrifice. THE Sanhedrin sat from
the close of the morning sacrifice to the
time of the evening sacrifice" (Tal-
mud, Jerus SanhedTin, chapter |.
Talmud, Bah, chapter 1O,l All these
requirements of the Jewish criminal
law were disregarded, Or lagrantly vio-
lated by the S@lhedrin, in one or all of
the meetings of that court held for the
trial of Christ, as we will learn by a
careful study of the history of these
meetings given by the evangelist.
But the Sanhedrin not only violated
the law in regard to the time of the
trial, but violated the law of evidence
governing the legal proof of the charge
The law of evidence requires.
1. The witnesses to be two in num-
Der. zone witness shall not testify
against any person. At the mouth Of
two witnesses or three witnesses shall
he that is worthy of death be put to
death" duet. xvii. 6. Mum. xxxv. 80. J
?. The witnesses to give their testi-
mony separately and always in the pres
ence of the accused. Daniel said to
the people concerning the old men who
testified against Susanna, separate them
and will examine them" (Apocrypha).